Home Prognostic Factors for Survival After Transarterial Chemoembolization Combined with Sorafenib in the Treatment of BCLC Stage B and C Hepatocellular Carcinomas
Post
Cancel

Prognostic Factors for Survival After Transarterial Chemoembolization Combined with Sorafenib in the Treatment of BCLC Stage B and C Hepatocellular Carcinomas

Rationale and Objective

The objective of this study was to analyze prognostic factors for survival after transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stages B and C.

Materials and Methods

Clinical data of 198 patients with BCLC stage B and C HCCs who underwent TACE combined with sorafenib between June 2012 and January 2017 were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Survival curves were detected using log-rank test. Univariate analysis was performed using log-rank test with respect to 11 prognostic factors potentially affecting survival. All statistically significant prognostic factors identified by univariate analysis were entered into a Cox proportion hazards regression model to identify independent predictors of survival. P values were two-sided and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

By the end of this study, the median follow-up duration was 43.6 months. The median overall survival (OS) of the patients was 21.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 16.94–25.05), and the 1-, 2-, 3- and 5-year OS rates were 72%, 43%, 28%, and 4%, respectively. Tumor size (χ 2 = 33.607, P < 0.0001), tumor number (χ 2 = 4.084, P = 0.043), Child-Pugh class (χ 2 = 33.187, P < 0.0001), BCLC stage (χ 2 = 50.224, P < 0.0001), portal vein tumor thrombus (χ 2 = 88.905, P < 0.0001), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (χ 2 = 98.007, P < 0.0001), extrahepatic spread (χ 2 = 34.980, P < 0.0001), TACE times (χ 2 = 8.350, P = 0.015), and sorafenib treatment strategy (χ 2 = 81.593, P < 0.0001) were found to be significantly associated with OS by univariate analysis. Multivariate analysis showed that BCLC stage (95% CI: 1.133–3.982, P = 0.019), extrahepatic spread (95% CI: 1.136–2.774, P = 0.012), and sorafenib treatment duration (95% CI: 0.352–0.574, P = 0.000) were independent prognostic factors associated with OS. There were no serious treatment-related adverse events.

Conclusions

This study showed that extrahepatic spread was a risk factor, and sorafenib treatment and superior BCLC stage were protective factors. Therefore, the study indicated that TACE combined with sorafenib was an effective and safe treatment for patients with BCLC stage B HCC without extrahepatic spread.

Introduction

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common malignances. HCC is the third leading causes of cancer mortality worldwide. More than 700,000 new cases are diagnosed as HCC annually and its incidence is increasing in Asia as well as in the rest of the world . Nowadays, surgical resection and liver transplantation are still considered as the first-line treatments for patients with very early- or early-stage HCC . However, HCC is a highly aggressive liver neoplasm; the majority of patients were diagnosed at the intermediate and advanced stages of tumor growth. The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system has been widely accepted as an offer treatment guideline that comprehensively considers the performance status of patients, hepatic function, tumor number, and tumor size. The BCLC staging system has been endorsed by the European Association for the Study of Liver Disease and the American Association for the Study of Liver Disease (AASLD) .

According to the BCLC staging system, transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and sorafenib have been recommended as the standard therapies for patients with HCC of BCLC stages B and C, respectively . Sorafenib is a kind of oral multikinase inhibitor with antiproliferative and antiangiogenic effects by blocking the RAF-MEK-ERK signal transduction pathway . Theoretically, sorafenib was believed to decrease the angiogenesis of solid tumor by inhibiting the expression level of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) after TACE treatment . Hence, sorafenib was expected to improve the clinical efficacy of TACE by decreasing post-TACE angiogenesis in the treatment of HCC. Portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT) is an important leading cause of BCLC stage C HCC-related deaths. Usually, PVTT can be a cause of tumor spreading, failure of liver function, and portal vein hypertension, which lead to complicated ascites and variceal rupture. According to the available clinical guidelines, sorafenib has been widely recommended as the standard therapy for HCC with PVTT. In recent years, several studies had considered TACE as a palliative treatment choice for patients with BCLC stage C HCC . Pan et al., Liu et al., and Liu et al. had reported that TACE was safe and effective in the treatment of advanced HCC with PVTT . In Asia, the BCLC stage C HCC is suggested to be an indication for TACE treatment, and an increasing number of clinical trials in the field of combined sorafenib and TACE treatment of HCC are taking place .

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Materials and Methods

Study Population

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Combined TACE-Sorafenib Therapy

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Treatment Efficacy and Toxicity Evaluation

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Follow-up

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Statistical Analysis

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Results

Patients

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

TABLE 1

Baseline Characteristics of the Included Patients in This Study

Variables No. of Patients (%) Age (y) ≤40 40 (20.2) 41~60 111 (56.1) >60 47 (23.7) Gender Male 174 (87.9) Female 24 (12.1) BCLC stage B 53 (26.8) C 145 (73.2) Tumor size Small HCC (TS ≤ 3 cm) 11 (5.6) Nodular type (3 cm < TS ≤ 5 cm) 27 (13.6) Massive type (5 cm < TS ≤ 10 cm) 87 (43.9) Huge type (10 cm < TS) 73 (36.9) Tumor number Single 65 (32.8) Multiple 133 (67.2) Child-Pugh class A 150 (75.8) B 48 (24.2) ECOG score 0 71 (35.9) 1 73 (36.9) 2 54 (27.2) PVTT None 112 (56.5) Branch type 57 (28.9) Trunk type 29 (14.6) AFP (ng/mL) <200 94 (47.5) ≥200 104 (52.5) Biopsy High differentiation 77 (61.6) Low differentiation 48 (38.4) Liver cirrhosis Yes 192 (96.9) Unknown 6 (3.1) Hepatitis Without 10 (5.1) With 188 (94.9) Extrahepatic spread Without 157 (79.3) With 41 (20.7) TACE times Once 42 (21.2) Twice 50 (25.3) ≥Triple 106 (53.5) Sorafenib (mo) <6 48 (24.2) 6–12 71 (35.9) >12 79 (39.9)

AFP, alpha fetal protein; BCLC, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer; ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; PVTT, portal vein tumor thrombus; TACE, transarterial chemoembolization.

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Treatment Efficacy

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Figure 1, Kaplan-Meier curve shows the overall survival rate for 198 patients who underwent TACE combined with sorafenib. TACE, transarterial chemoembolization.

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

TABLE 2

Prognostic Factors for Survival by Univariate Analysis

Variables No. of Patients Overall Survival Rate Median Survival Time (mo) (95% Confidence Interval) χ 2 P 1 y 2 y 3 y 5 y Tumor size (cm) 33.607 <0.001 Small HCC (≤3) 11 0.91 0.70 0.54 0.32 40 (22.30–57.70) Nodular type (3–5) 27 0.93 0.73 0.42 0.06 35 (28.55–41.45) Massive type (5–10) 87 0.75 0.43 0.39 0.05 22 (18.16–25.84) Huge type (>10) 73 0.58 0.25 0.04 0.00 13 (11.73–14.27) Tumor number 4.084 0.043 Single 65 0.84 0.51 0.35 0.05 27 (22.48–31.52) Multiple 133 0.66 0.38 0.25 0.04 17 (13.32–20.68) PVTT 88.905 <0.001 None 112 0.88 0.58 0.42 0.07 32 (25.09–38.91) Branch 57 0.67 0.36 0.18 0.00 14 (8.39–19.61) Trunk 29 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 (4.78–13.22) BCLC stage 50.224 <0.001 B 53 0.94 0.87 0.65 0.13 42 (37.65–46.35) C 145 0.64 0.27 0.15 0.00 14 (12.72–15.27) ECOG score 98.007 <0.001 0 71 0.97 0.72 0.55 0.09 39 (34.29–43.71) 1 73 0.74 0.41 0.18 0.00 19 (11.04–26.96) 2 54 0.37 0.06 0.06 0.00 10 (7.06–12.93) Child-Pugh class 33.187 <0.001 A 150 080 0.51 0.35 0.06 27 (19.27–34.74) B 48 0.46 0.16 0.07 0.00 11 (7.01–14.99) Extrahepatic spread 34.980 <0.001 Without 157 0.78 0.51 0.35 0.05 27 (21.12–32.88) With 41 0.49 0.08 0.00 0.00 10 (4.16–15.84) TACE times 8.350 0.015 Once 42 0.51 0.30 0.26 0.00 12 (9.39–14.61) Twice 50 0.65 0.37 0.25 0.13 17 (11.13–22.87) ≥Triple 106 0.84 0.50 0.32 0.05 25 (21.16–28.84) Sorafenib (mo) 81.593 <0.001 <6 48 0.39 0.16 0.05 0.00 8 (6.37–9.64) 6–12 71 0.62 0.20 0.12 0.00 14 (13.03–14.97) >12 79 0.99 0.73 0.51 0.09 37 (33.07–40.93)

BCLC, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer; ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; PVTT, portal vein tumor thrombus; TACE, transarterial chemoembolization.

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Prognostic Factors for Survival

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

TABLE 3

Independent Prognostic Factors for Survival by Multivariate Analysis

Variables_B_ SE Wald Sig Exp(B) 95% CI for Exp(B) Lower Upper Sorafenib −0.799 0.124 41.209 0.000 0.450 0.352 0.574 BCLC stage 0.754 0.321 5.525 0.019 2.125 1.133 3.982 Extrahepatic spread 0.574 0.228 6.348 0.012 1.775 1.136 2.774

B , regression coefficient; BCLC, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer; CI, confidence interval; Exp(B), odds ratio; SE, standard error; Sig, P value; Wald, χ 2 value.

Figure 2, Kaplan-Meier curve shows the overall survival rates for 198 patients with different prognostic factors for survival after transarterial chemoembolization combined with sorafenib. ( a ) Patients with a different strategy of sorafenib treatment. ( b ) Patients with different clinical stages of BCLC classification. ( c ) Patients with and without extrahepatic spread hepatocellular carcinoma. BCLC, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer.

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Safety and Toxicity

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Discussion

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<

References

  • 1. Wallace M.C., Preen D., Jeffrey G.P., et. al.: The evolving epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma: a global perspective. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015; 9: pp. 765-779.

  • 2. Kabbach G., Assi H.A., Bolotin G., et. al.: Hepatobiliary tumors: update on diagnosis and management. J Clin Transl Hepatol 2015; 3: pp. 169-181.

  • 3. Venook A.P., Papandreou C., Furuse J., et. al.: The incidence and epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma: a global and regional perspective. Oncologist 2010; 15: pp. 5-13.

  • 4. Bruix J., Sherman M., American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an update. Hepatology 2011; 53: pp. 1020-1022.

  • 5. Italian Association for the Study of the Liver (AISF) , AISF Expert Panel , AISF Coordinating Committee , et. al.: Position paper of the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver (AISF): the multidisciplinary clinical approach to hepatocellular carcinoma. Dig Liver Dis 2013; 45: pp. 712-723.

  • 6. Bruix J., Han K.H., Gores G., et. al.: Liver cancer: approaching a personalized care. J Hepatol 2015; 62: pp. S144-S156.

  • 7. Kinoshita A., Onoda H., Fushiya N., et. al.: Staging systems for hepatocellular carcinoma: current status and future perspectives. World J Hepatol 2015; 7: pp. 406-424.

  • 8. Duseja A.: Staging of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Exp Hepatol 2014; 4: pp. S74-S79.

  • 9. Haydar A.A., Mukherji D., Faraj W., et. al.: Challenges in combining antiangiogenic therapy with transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastrointest Cancer Res 2014; 7: pp. 98-102.

  • 10. Erhardt A., Kolligs F., Dollinger M., et. al.: TACE plus sorafenib for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: results of the multicenter, phase II SOCRATES trial. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2014; 74: pp. 947-954.

  • 11. Liu P.H., Hsia C.Y., Lee Y.H., et. al.: Surgical resection versus transarterial chemoembolization for BCLC stage C hepatocellular carcinoma. J Surg Oncol 2015; 111: pp. 404-409.

  • 12. Ray C.E., Brown A.C., Green T.J., et. al.: Survival outcomes in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with drug-eluting bead chemoembolization. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 204: pp. 440-447.

  • 13. Pan T., Li X.S., Xie Q.K., et. al.: Safety and efficacy of transarterial chemoembolization plus sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal venous tumour thrombus. Clin Radiol 2014; 69: pp. e553-e561.

  • 14. Liu P.H., Lee Y.H., Hsia C.Y., et. al.: Surgical resection versus transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis: a propensity score analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 2014; 21: pp. 1825-1833.

  • 15. Liu L., Zhang C., Zhao Y., et. al.: Transarterial chemoembolization for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis: prognostic factors in a single-center study of 188 patients. Biomed Res Int 2014; 2014: pp. 194278.

  • 16. Varghese J., Kedarisetty C., Venkataraman J., et. al.: Combination of TACE and sorafenib improves outcomes in BCLC stages B/C of hepatocellular carcinoma: a single centre experience. Ann Hepatol 2017; 16: pp. 247-254.

  • 17. Zhang X., Wang K., Wang M., et. al.: Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with sorafenib versus TACE for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget 2017; 8: pp. 29416-29427.

  • 18. Liu F., Meng Z., Shao G., et. al.: Patterns of sorafenib and TACE treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in a Chinese population: subgroup analysis of the GIDEON study. Mol Biol Rep 2017; 44: pp. 149-158.

  • 19. Zhang L., Hu P., Chen X., et. al.: Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) plus sorafenib versus TACE for intermediate or advanced stage hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 2014; 9: pp. e100305.

  • 20. Llovet J.M., Fuster J., Bruix J., et. al.: The Barcelona approach: diagnosis, staging, and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver Transpl 2004; 10: pp. S115-S120.

  • 21. Llovet J.M., Brú C., Bruix J.: Prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: the BCLC staging classification. Semin Liver Dis 1999; 19: pp. 329-338.

  • 22. Lencioni R., Llovet J.M.: Modified RECIST (mRECIST) assessment for hepatocellular carcinoma. Semin Liver Dis 2010; 30: pp. 52-60.

  • 23. Marelli L., Stigliano R., Triantos C., et. al.: Transarterial therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: which technique is more effective? A systematic review of cohort and randomized studies. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2007; 30: pp. 6-25.

  • 24. Zhao Y., Wang W.J., Guan S., et. al.: Sorafenib combined with transarterial chemoembolization for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a large-scale multicenter study of 222 patients. Ann Oncol 2013; 24: pp. 1786-1792.

  • 25. Meyer T., Fox R., Ma Y.T., et. al.: Sorafenib in combination with transarterial chemoembolisation in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (TACE 2): a randomised placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 2: pp. 565-575.

  • 26. Nakashima T., Kojiro M.: Pathologic characteristics of hepatocellular carcinoma. Semin Liver Dis 1986; 6: pp. 259-266.

  • 27. Bruix J., Sala M., Llovet J.M.: Chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology 2004; 127: pp. S179-S188.

  • 28. Lencioni R.: Chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma. Semin Oncol 2012; 39: pp. 503-509.

  • 29. Farinati F., Giacomin A., Vanin V., et. al.: TACE treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma: what should we do now?. J Hepatol 2012; 57: pp. 221-222.

  • 30. Xu L.F., Ni J.Y., Sun H.L., et. al.: Effects of hypoxia-inducible factor-1α silencing on the proliferation of CBRH-7919 hepatoma cells. World J Gastroenterol 2013; 19: pp. 1749-1759.

  • 31. Carmeliet P., Jain R.K.: Angiogenesis in cancer and other diseases. Nature 2000; 407: pp. 249-257.

  • 32. Ferrín G., Aguilar-Melero P., Rodríguez-Perálvarez M., et. al.: Biomarkers for hepatocellular carcinoma: diagnostic and therapeutic utility. Hepat Med 2015; 7: pp. 1-10.

  • 33. Yim H.J., Suh S.J., Um S.H.: Current management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an Eastern perspective. World J Gastroenterol 2015; 21: pp. 3826-3842.

  • 34. Tejeda-Maldonado J., García-Juárez I., Aguirre-Valadez J., et. al.: Diagnosis and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: an update. World J Hepatol 2015; 7: pp. 362-376.

This post is licensed under CC BY 4.0 by the author.